Comment on “The Self‐Care of Psychologists and Mental Health Professionals” (Dattilio, 2015)

Professor Frank Dattilio's article “The Self‐care of Psychologists and Mental Health Professionals” provides an overview of stress and related mental health problems among psychologists, and a proposition that psychologists are not vigilant in regard to self‐care. Dattilio offers a range of self‐care strategies and recommendations, and highlights self‐care practices within various psychology frameworks, and concludes with some “healthy tips” for managing stress. In my commentary I underscore Dattilio's message that self‐care is of critical importance in psychology practice, given the responsibility of caring for others inherent in the work psychologists undertake. However, I raise additional points of consideration and suggest an alternative approach to addressing the self‐care needs of the profession. My commentary makes the following points: (a) the need to distinguish between psychology trainees and practising qualified psychologists when addressing stress and self‐care requirements in the profession; (b) the importance of developing a culture of self‐care among psychologists by providing self‐care instruction during training; (c) the need to temper research findings on stress and mental health among psychologists by the methodological weakness of the studies in this area; (d) adhering to the recent call from colleagues to shift from a focus on pathology and punishment to a positive acceptance, mindfulness, and values‐based approach for encouraging self‐care among psychologists; (e) the use of a systematic framework for organising the presentation of self‐care strategies that makes them more accessible; and (f) an appeal to professional bodies to take their responsibility in promoting self‐care in the profession.     

Developing Metacompetence in Low Intensity Cognitive‐Behavioural Therapy (CBT) Interventions: Evaluating a Self‐Practice/Self‐Reflection Programme for Experienced Low Intensity CBT Practitioners

Self‐practice/self‐reflection (SP/SR) is a targeted training and professional development strategy in which clinicians practice cognitive‐behavioural therapy (CBT) techniques and processes on themselves and then working through a structured process of self‐reflection. Previous studies with CBT trainees and experienced mental health practitioners have found that SP/SR or experiencing CBT “from the inside out” has been perceived by participants as increasing competency in a number of important areas and increasing therapist flexibility and artistry. Low intensity (LI) practitioners are identified as a relatively new addition to mental health service delivery in the UK. These workers are differentiated from traditional mental health practitioners by a shorter training period, the delivery of a circumscribed number of CBT interventions, and a very high weekly patient load. This study, the first of its kind, reports outcomes from an SP/SR programme undertaken by seven experienced LI CBT practitioners. Participants used the following measures to track their experience of the programme: time spent on programme, personal‐ and therapy‐related belief rating, goals attained, and perceived skill rated for average and most difficult patients. Results showed a positive change in work‐related skill and behaviour change, particularly when working with the more difficult patients. The findings are consistent with those found in other groups of therapists (e.g., trainee CBT therapists and highly experienced CBT therapists), suggesting that SP/SR may be a valuable addition to LI intensity training and professional development. These findings are discussed in the context of the particular needs of LI practitioners.     

Invited Response to Commentaries: Self‐Practice/Self‐Reflection (SP/SR): Contexts,Challenges and Ways Forward

McGinn (2015) and Fernández‐Álvarez, Castañeiras, and Wyss (2015) make valuable suggestions in their commentaries on the three self‐practice/self‐reflection (SP/SR) articles in this issue of the Australian Psychologist. In our response, we use their commentaries as a springboard to highlight contextual influences and challenges for future SP/SR research, and suggest potential ways forward.     

What do we learn in psychoanalytic training?

Can one define the aims of psychoanalytic training that most analysts would agree upon? For more than a decade the EPF Working Party ‘End of Training Evaluation Project (ETEP)’ has worked on this issue. Summarizing results of this work the author describes a set of basic elements every developing analyst should have learned or internalized during his training. His assertion is that most analysts notwithstanding their theoretical orientation could agree upon these necessary requirements for a successful ending of psychoanalytic training. These elements are demonstrated in the ability to understand the emotional demand of a patient in every session and the often ensuing emotional storm, to appreciate and deeply understand the value of free association, to preserve a neutral stance, to think in terms of transference and countertransference, and to think conceptually about what is happening and what one is doing in the session.     

Training therapists to work effectively online and offline within digital culture

The speed at which technology evolves, and therefore the speed at which online mental health services evolve and the training required to keep up with them, has become a real concern for the profession. The need for training in transferring face-to-face skills to the online environment has been recognised for some years by leading professional organisations as not only desirable but also essential. In addition, there is an increasing need to keep abreast of digital culture and the type of online environments that clients inhabit. This applies to counsellors and therapists whatever space they are using to deliver services, which may be in the traditional face-to-face consulting room or using tools that enable therapy at a distance, such as the Internet.